SoylentNews

fliptop writes:

The tool could let teachers spot plagiarism or help social media platforms fight disinformation bots:

Hidden patterns purposely buried in AI-generated texts could help identify them as such, allowing us to tell whether the words we're reading are written by a human or not.

These "watermarks" are invisible to the human eye but let computers detect that the text probably comes from an AI system. If embedded in large language models, they could help prevent some of the problems that these models have already caused.

For example, since OpenAI's chatbot ChatGPT was launched in November, students have already started cheating by using it to write essays for them. News website CNET has used ChatGPT to write articles, only to have to issue corrections amid accusations of plagiarism. Building the watermarking approach into such systems before they're released could help address such problems.

In studies, these watermarks have already been used to identify AI-generated text with near certainty. Researchers at the University of Maryland, for example, were able to spot text created by Meta's open-source language model, OPT-6.7B, using a detection algorithm they built. The work is described in a paper that's yet to be peer-reviewed, and the code will be available for free around February 15.

[...] There are limitations to this new method, however. Watermarking only works if it is embedded in the large language model by its creators right from the beginning. Although OpenAI is reputedly working on methods to detect AI-generated text, including watermarks, the research remains highly secretive. The company doesn't tend to give external parties much information about how ChatGPT works or was trained, much less access to tinker with it. OpenAI didn't immediately respond to our request for comment.

Related:

• BuzzFeed Preps AI-Written Content While CNET Fumbles
• Seattle Public Schools Bans ChatGPT; District 'Requires Original Thought and Work From Students'
• ChatGPT Arrives in the Academic World
• OpenAI's New ChatGPT Bot: 10 "Dangerous" Things it's Capable of

Original Submission

fliptop writes:

These read like a proof of concept for replacing human writers:

Earlier this year, when BuzzFeed announced plans to start publishing AI-assisted content, its CEO Jonah Peretti promised the tech would be held to a high standard.

"I think that there are two paths for AI in digital media," Peretti told CNN. "One path is the obvious path that a lot of people will do — but it's a depressing path — using the technology for cost savings and spamming out a bunch of SEO articles that are lower quality than what a journalist could do, but a tenth of the cost."

[...] Indeed, the first AI content BuzzFeed published — a series of quizzes that turned user input into customized responses — were an interesting experiment, avoiding many of the missteps that other publishers have made with the tech.

It doesn't seem like that commitment to quality has held up, though. This month, we noticed that with none of the fanfare of Peretti's multiple interviews about the quizzes, BuzzFeed quietly started publishing fully AI-generated articles that are produced by non-editorial staff — and they sound a lot like the content mill model that Peretti had promised to avoid.

[...] A BuzzFeed spokesperson told us that the AI-generated pieces are part of an "experiment" the company is doing to see how well its AI writing assistance incorporates statements from non-writers.

The linked article includes many laughable examples of bland and similar phrases in multiple stories published on the site.

Previously: BuzzFeed Preps AI-Written Content While CNET Fumbles

Original Submission